Author
Topic: Someone explain the fiscal cliff (Read 1814 times)

Everyone is afraid of going over the fiscal cliff. I have watched the news for months on this, and I am a bit confused.

Wasn't the fiscal cliff put in place to force change if the government would not do it's job?

I understand the fiscal cliff to include tax increases and massive spending cuts, even to the military.

What is wrong with that. The dem want spending to stay the same and taxes to go up. the republicans want taxes to remain the same, and spending to decrease. While it is much more than that, this is it in a nut shell.

So going over the cliff makes both sides give to the other. Taxes go up (yeah say the dems) and spending is decreased (yeah say the repubs)

If there is a true concern of 16 trillion in debt, then why not let the government go over the cliff? Seems to me, if congress can not do what is right, then forcing them is the next best thing. I thought that was what the fiscal cliff was all about.

I would not mind paying more IF spending was decreased, the debt went down, and thing would be better for my kids in years to come. I do not think for one minute that more money flowing to Washington would do nothing more than increase the amount they would spend. So I choose to keep (and vote accordingly if it matters) as much as I can and plan on helping my kids as much as I can, regardless of what happens in Washington.

Someone tell me why not go over the cliff, then go from there. Let the chips fall where they may. Congress created this. Let them pay the price and if folks get upset, maybe some more change can be brought about from it.

It sounds good, but the dems would cut the old folks out and keep the millions annually to study rain forests as the old folks died.

They would cut the police and military, but increase the billions in gifts to foreign countries.

And on and on and on.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

Congress can not pass a budget for the past 3 or 4 years, and can not even pass a bill to help hurricane Sandy survivors with cleanup without adding pork and bickering that they all need something out of it to get their vote. It makes perhaps going over a cliff a real shot in the arm.

I say cut ever department, every agency, and everybody getting federal dollars by 10%. I don't care the area, there is always something to cut and the 10% could be found if needed. If they did that, it would solve much.

Unfortunately, I think that the path we are on will only get worse and until we hit rock bottom, and until that happens nothing will change.

If anyone has not seen the movie "Evita" it is a good movie to watch. It does have it's application towards what is happening today in this country.

Oh, puhleas, Luvin honey. Thanks for the backup. Everything the bummer has offered in that link either cuts the elderly or the military.

Thanks for the support of what I said.

Obama's latest offer brought the two sides billions of dollars closer, but it also generated protests from some in the Democratic base because it included some benefit cuts in entitlement programs, such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

In response, Obama on Monday offered $200 million in new cuts to discretionary federal government spending, divided evenly between defense and nondefense programs.

The chained CPI includes assumptions on consumer habits with regard to rising prices, such as seeking cheaper alternatives, and would result in smaller benefit increases in future years. Labor unions and advocacy groups for the elderly oppose it.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

I believe that's called compromise. Without it, nobody gets anywhere. You can't have it both ways. If he refused to give on anything, you would call him on it. When he gives on something Dems really care about, you're still calling him on it. So, where are Republicans proposing to cut? Only pork fat that nobody cares about or wants?

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

Pork fat that nobody cares about or wants should be where the cuts are made. Don't you think?That's where the waste is.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

Exactly. I was being ironic. I don't think there IS such a thing as pork fat nobody wants. It's in the budget because someone is invested in it being there. Where are the Republicans proposing to cut that is less painful?

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

I have said it before, they are all crooked and corrupt. None of them are going to make meaningful cuts, but all will go along with raising taxes. It's just that the repubs. do 6% of the job where the dems only do 4% of the job.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

I have said it before, they are all crooked and corrupt. None of them are going to make meaningful cuts, but all will go along with raising taxes. It's just that the repubs. do 6% of the job where the dems only do 4% of the job.

I couldn't agree more. There are very, very few politicians that are worth anything near what they are earning. The Democrats had complete control, the House, Senate and White House, for two years... and still failed to pass a budget. The republicans are only marginally better.

The big worry is that the fiscal cliff is expected to send us into a recession. I would reply with - so what? We've been struggling for years, now. And, at least this way, we'd know that our struggles were actually accomplishing something.

But, even if we go over the cliff, we're still up the ol' creek without a paddle. Here's the real kicker - going over the cliff doesn't fix the debt. It only reduces the deficit (and by only about half). So, in other words, our government is still spending more money than it takes in - even if we go over the cliff. Our debt will continue to grow... just not quite as fast.

the sole purpose of the government was meant and should still be to protect citizens from foreign aggressors. period. they should stay out of the business of parenting the citizen's. they have become a organization of what's in it for me. once they found out that they could steal more money than needed from the people and use it to increase their own wealth and status it only became a matter of time till it implodes on it's self.

How about freezing all salaries of Congress and Senate until they come up with some workable? I don't get paid for not doing my job.

If you compare the salary of members of Congress to the responsibilities of members of Congress, they are grossly underpaid Anyone handling a multi-trillion dollar budget in the private sector would be paid much more. Of course, the real problem is bribery (read campaign contributions, speaking fees, book deals etc etc.) My suggestion is that each member of Congress should be paid $1 million per year and should be prohibited from receiving any other family income at all. No investments, no book deals, nothing . That would help reduce bribery and also make it more possible for less wealthy but talented people to serve in Congress.

How about freezing all salaries of Congress and Senate until they come up with some workable? I don't get paid for not doing my job.

If you compare the salary of members of Congress to the responsibilities of members of Congress, they are grossly underpaid Anyone handling a multi-trillion dollar budget in the private sector would be paid much more. Of course, the real problem is bribery (read campaign contributions, speaking fees, book deals etc etc.) My suggestion is that each member of Congress should be paid $1 million per year and should be prohibited from receiving any other family income at all. No investments, no book deals, nothing . That would help reduce bribery and also make it more possible for less wealthy but talented people to serve in Congress.

That is VERY interesting. What ideas do you have for them getting elected in the first place, though, as that's where it seems to start--a need for great wealth to even mount a campaign.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson